Posts Tagged ‘498a’
Divorce Epidemic as of 2011
Posted on: May 31, 2015
Here is the big picture of divorce epidemic in the Indian sub-continent. Though the numbers may not seem alarming to western readers this is indeed a whopping number for Indians. If not checked immediately this is going to grow exponentially and will destroy the foundation of a great nation which has over 10000 years of continuous heritage to claim. Solution is simple… stick to the roots, be who you are…. stick to the principles; as opposed to being copycats.
Satyam vada (Speak the truth.)
Dharmam Chara (Practice righteous dharmam)
Ahimsa paramo dharmam (Non-violence greatest dharmam)
Satyameva jayathe (Truth alone Triumphs)
Matru Devo Bhava (Consider your Mother as a form of God)
Pitru Devo Bhava (Consider your Father as a form of God)
Athithi Devo Bhava Consider your Guests as a form of God)
India
3 member Justice Verma committee wrote 644 pages long report in 18 days [last date to submit deliberations was on Jan 5 and report came out on Jan 23rd, hence 18days; skeptics can add few more days at will] after scrutinising about 80000 deliberations submitted by public!!! Unbelievable huh? Whatever it may be, lets assume that they did it, they did a great job! Let us assume there was no involvement of political hyenas waiting for the right event to push their hidden agenda. Let us not be cynical and go over the report in nondiscriminatory way. Before we peep into this monster report let me remind you the purpose for which this committee was constituted; The report itself says “This Committee was constituted by Govt of India Notification No. SO(3003)E, dated Dec 23, 2012 to look into possible amendments of the Criminal Law to provide for quicker trial and enhanced punishment for criminals committing sexual assault of extreme nature against women”. If your brain is not over-sensitised and biased towards women I would solicit your attention to this critical analysis.
First of all let me point out the unprecedented references to United Nations in the report. Justice Verma, please enlighten me with India’s constitutional liability, if any, towards meeting the UN agreements, rules, regulations, goals and standards. Why would a sovereign nation’s law making process ever consider the UN orders and obligations towards them? Are we subservient to Rockefeller’s United Nations? Were the committee got paid by the tax payers or by the globalists?
Interestingly enough, this committee made an astonishing finding that the main villain is “patriarchy” that impairs the dignity of women. During the 30 days period this committee had contacted several government authorities like Delhi police commissioner, chief minister, CBI, National commission for protection of Child Rights, National commission for women, various registrars of high courts across the nation, so on and so forth; but I couldn’t find any questions asking for the role of this main villain in the offenses committed in their respective jurisdictions. Since their responses are not included in the report I don’t know how did the committee reach this conclusion!
If I get the concept of patriarchy right, it is a form of social code-of-ethics and conduct practiced by some religious communities where men takes the role of protector and provider, and women live a life free of cost. A peculiar setup in which, from cradle to grave everything is provided to women. Now Justice Verma committee recommends to shift that role, not to the sovereign women, but to the government. Remember, this is a government which do not even recognise the value of time, the need to have proper sanitation, even the need of enough public latrines and don’t know how to run the ones that exists! First they make enough draconian laws to boot away men from women and then pull the plug; just the way Aadhaar scam worked, first they announced cash transfer to lure the naive and strip the entire public off of their privacy and valuable information, put them all in a database like criminals, then they say cash transfer is possible only after everyone gets bank account!!! I know, I know you are lost; but don’t worry read on, I will try my best to clear the smoke screen.
There are some excellent recommendations in this report which definitely deserve some applause. In general most of the suggested amendments are gender neutral. Recommendation to introduce separate sections for gang rape, repeated offenses and differentiating rape from other non-violent assaults are laudable. Report also lays out a clear procedure of investigating sexual assault cases. Here I’m listing only those that caught my attention and I feel inappropriate.
This committee lays out a long description about female feticide, infanticide, malnutrition, tradition and religious practices, Khap panchayaths, honor killing and all those typical radical feminazi arguments and failed to quote any references or citations to the basis of those claims. None of these are backed by any scientific studies or surveys and to my knowledge these are not gender issues. And then the report says,
“In view of the above, we come to the following conclusions and make the following recommendations:”
As far as prevention of rape is concerned, (which is obviously not the set goal of this committee) the suggestions set forth by this committee are very silly like installing street lights, provide sanitation, outlaw tinted glasses on vehicles, increase police patrol etc. There is no constructive plans laid out to overhaul the totally dysfunctional justice system.
Committee decriminalise child sex or encourages it?
Committee recommends that the age of consent be reduced to sixteen. It says, this is not to criminalise consensual sex between two individuals even if they are below eighteen years of age. This is because UN convention on child rights 11th December, 1992 said so and Government of India has acceded to that. See, now Rockefeller’s United Nation decides at what age kids in India can have sex! Unless and until we have veto power in UN we should not honor any of the madness they create. Why didn’t the committee recommend to amend marriage acts to reduce the marriageable age? Is it intended to create a community of unmarried teen parents?
When the right of private defense of the body extends to causing death:
The present suggestion to amendment IPC Section 100 is gender neutral and fits quite well in a genuine crime scene. But the suggested clauses like intention of committing rape, unnatural lust, intention of kidnapping or abducting are extremely hard to prove. What is the definition of “unnatural lust”?
Reading it together with the other suggestion of recognising sex without consent inside marriage as rape and the numerous murder cases where men and women are murdered for money or extramarital affairs, this clause, if implemented, will only do more good to such murderers than to genuine rape victims.
166A. Public Servant knowingly disobeying direction of law
This suggestion recommends to punish those officers, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years rigorous imprisonment and fine, who do not record information given to him under Section 154(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure; but it only applies to a handful of sections!!! Is it any less crime if they do so in other offenses?
More over considering the magnitude of the abuse of other women centric laws like domestic violence act, 498(A) and even the existing rape clause “sex based on marriage promise”, this clause, if implemented, will open up new greener pastures for unscrupulous women and will over-burden judiciary and tax payers.
326A.Voluntarily causing grievous hurt through use of acid etc:
This is an attempt to classify a crime based on the tools used for the assault which appears to be very naive and not well-thought. More over, it will bring 10+ years of imprisonment for a crime as minor as leaving a scratch, cut or bruise; to me it looks like an attempt to target the Muslim community as it includes genital mutilation; all under the cover of acid attack!!! Point to be noted is that “Irreversible damage” is not a precondition here. As I mentioned above, now it is gender neutral but worth keeping an eye on.
354. Sexual Assault and Punishment for sexual assault
Committee failed to define the offense in an unambiguous way leaving lots of confusion that can result in total destruction of basic human values and will lead to utter chaos as what happened in domestic violence act and IPC498(A) cases.
(a)Intentional touching of another person when such act of touching is of a sexual nature and is without the recipient’s consent;
What is the definition of “sexual nature” here? Is that depending on the perspective of the judge who hear the case or is that based on the perception of the ‘victim’ or something else? Should the consent be written, oral or should no-news be considered as good-news? At what point a gesture of affection become assault, is totally missed out in this recommendation.
Section 375: Rape
Here, taking out the most absurd clause “sex under the false promise of marriage” is extremely laudable. Hi-fives to Justice Verma. If passed into law, this will definitely reduce heck load of work off the shoulders of police and judiciary for sure. Even though the language of definitions are generally gender neutral and acceptable the following explanation is bit icky.
Explanation III: Consent will not be presumed in the event of an existing marital relationship between the complainant and the accused.
Explanation IV. – Consent means an unequivocal voluntary agreement when the person by words, gestures or any form of non-verbal communication, communicates willingness to participate in the specific act.
Provided that, a person who does not offer actual physical resistance to the act of penetration is not by reason only of that fact, to be regarded as consenting to the sexual activity.
It is icky not because the definition is unclear or wrong, but because it undermines the legitimacy of a relationship which is considered to be sacred by many. If a couple cannot find agreement in the act of exercising fundamental bondage, they shouldn’t be living together in the first place; neither that relationship is eligible to be called as marriage. In the case of Sexual harassment at workplace bill, the main argument for not making it gender neutral is by challenging the number of incidents of such harassment happened to men. In this particular case of marital rape, it would be easy to collect medical reports if any such violent incident ever occurred, but none got cited here. This provision only helps to simply deny consent as an afterthought and so doesn’t attract any merits. I know this is an imported piece of legislation from morally underdeveloped western countries. Until we lay out a proper investigation procedure and legislating prenuptial agreements, this piece of recommendation has to be totally discarded. No spouse should bet 7+years of their life (possibly their very life itself, if IPC100 recommendation becomes law) to run a family. What is the need to make the institution of family so ugly, dangerous and a hostile environment? If the goal is to reduce population by discouraging marriages, let me tell the committee with all due respect, it’s not to meet this purpose that we tax payers paid you.
CrPC Amendments
Amendment to the proviso to section 160. Lifting the age limit of boys from 16 to 18 is greatly appreciated. The investigating officer will have to record his statement at his own residence.
Insertion of Section 198B:
Wife can accuse husband for rape and court has to take cognizance but if husband does the same courts cannot! Husband has to go the police file a complaint, and convince the police and at the mercy of the officer he may or may not get justice. Is this the constitutionally guaranteed equality before law as per Justice Verma? Embarrassing!!!
AMENDMENTS OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872
Amendment to Section 114A
‘114A. (1) In a prosecution for rape under sub-section (2) of section 376 or for gang rape under Section 376C of the Indian Penal Code, where sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and the question is whether it was without the consent of the other person alleged to have been raped and such other person states in his/her evidence before the court that she or he did not consent, the court shall presume that she or he did not consent.
This is the most notorious and shameful suggestion in the whole report. Conviction based on Presumptions and assumptions are a total disgrace to any modern justice system. This contradicts with the basic principles like “treating innocent until proven guilty”, proving an offense “beyond reasonable doubt” and also takes away the inherent right of judiciary to apply its mind!!! If implemented, it will enable any women to file rape suite after any type of intercourse; whether paid or unpaid. It opens up the pandora box for the blackmailers and retaliators totally discarding natural justice!. Shame on you Mr. Verma!
Amendment to Section 146
“it shall not be permissible to adduce evidence or to put questions in the cross- examination of the victim as to his or her general moral character, or as to his or her previous sexual experience with any person.”
Hard coding moral rules into an Act is not a progressive step. I am not a proponent to put restrictions on what to ask or what not to ask. Lawyers should ask this this and this, don’t ask this and that, court should presume this this and this, assume this or that; what is going on here? Is this recommendation coming from a former Chief Justice? Absurd! It may, if otherwise earth is going to stop oscillating, fit in the Bar Council Rules but definitely not in any Act or code.
AMENDMENT TO THE ARMED FORCES (SPECIAL POWERS) ACT, 1958
This one has already gained its fair share of criticism. See what Times of India reported.
“I have almost 1,000 personnel under me, and they are spread across some five kilometres. They could go on leave, or temporary duty. How am I to ensure their sexual conduct throughout the year, 24 hours a day?” asks a Commanding Officer of and army unit.
Some obvious questions.
I hope now you got an insight about the rotten and stinky parts of this report. Do you think it is for the good of the society to have this kind of irrational laws? Do you think it is for the benefit of women in the long run or even in the short run? Do you think these are human errors? Do you think this is a step forward, as a society? Do you think it will improve our civilisation? If your answer to any one of those question is ‘No’ what would you think is the reason for this “mistake”? What are the chances that this report is highly influenced and politically inflated? What is the reason to allocate several pages bragging about constitution, gender equality and what not, but at the same time lay out a SEPARATE bill of rights for one gender? Isn’t this an attempt by a political party to play the good samaritan role; the savior of women; the champion of women empowerment and the chances of that party is so weak and feeble in the upcoming election? Do you have at least 10% hope in implementing 1% of this report? Do you think it is a political gimmick wasting tax-payer’s money? Do you think there is external influence in destabilising our social fabric? What could be the reason to include baseless unscientific unproven feminazi delusions in this report? Why is UN so important for internal law making of a sovereign nation?
New World Order operative’s plan to destroy the foundation of our nation is working out pretty well.
Morons in India are applauding it as women empowerment.
Who is the single largest sponsor of feminism? Rockefeller Foundation…
Where is UN head office sitting? On Rockefeller’s property (though donated)…
Who is running ICICI bank? The Rockefellers…
Who is running Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)? The Rockefellers…
Who wants to implant RFID chip on every human being on earth? The Rockefellers…
What is the first step towards RFID? Aadhaar/UID
Who is Rothchild’s puppet? The Rockefellers…
Who wants to introduce Aadhaar/UID in India… THE BANKS…..
Who is the the Father of RBI? Lord Rothchilds….
Who is the financial advisory of Govt of India? The Rothchilds
Read “Is boy preference a brain product of CFR” and learn more.
उत्तिष्टता जाग्रता प्राप्यवरण निभोदता
.
Honorable Justice Verma Committee
This is with reference to the invitation for suggestions on amendments to Criminal Laws relating to Safety and Security of Women. I do believe that laws can protect people but I also strongly believe that laws can only protect people from the aggression of that particular offender. So, if the idea is to prevent an incident like Delhi gang rape from happening ever again in the main land of India, IMHO, we need to take a three step approach (not quick-fix workarounds) as listed below; sorted based on priority.
- Strengthen self defense laws so as to make it people-friendly as opposed to governance-friendly.
- Overhaul the criminal justice system to deliver quality judgments on a time bound manner.
- Improve and standardize law enforcement procedures.
Strengthen self defense laws
It is impractical and impossible to give police protection to every single women in this country. Historically, Indian police and law enforcement authorities have been posing the major threat to women. And it is a known fact that nearly 99% of them evade the legal process and go scott free. Any steps towards that path will be doing more harm than even an ounce of good. This is where Gandhiji’s words makes more sense than anything else; “Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look back upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” [Autobiography page 446].
All citizens have the natural god given right to self-defense, which is recognised by the Indian Constitution as well as the Indian Penal Code, however this right is meaningless without the right to have the tools of self-defense! Honorable bench of Supreme Court (D.K. Jain, H.L. Dattu) ruled in Sikandar Singh & Ors. vs State Of Bihar on 9 July, 2010
25.It is well settled that the burden of establishing the plea of self defence is on the accused but it is not as onerous as the one that lies on the prosecution. While the prosecution is required to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, the accused need not establish the plea of self defence to the hilt and may discharge the onus by showing preponderance of probabilities in favour of that plea on the basis of the material on record. In Vidhya Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh16, this Court had observed that right of self defense should not be construed narrowly because it is a very valuable right and has a social purpose. (Also see: Munshi Ram & Ors. Vs. Delhi Administration17; The State of Gujarat Vs. Bai Fatima & Anr.18 and Salim Zia Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh19.)
The only hindrance to citizen’s right to self defense is now the Government of India. I humbly request the honorable commission to seriously consider urging the government to amend Indian Arms Act 1959 and Arms Policies/Rules in a way that self-defense tools can be made available to the law abiding citizens as easy and cheap as knives and axes. Had any one of those couple who boarded the bus in Delhi carry a fire arm this heinous crime would have never occurred. Just by showing the gun or firing a warning shot could have prevented it, or in worst case scenario they could have injured the offenders if not take their life.
Showing Sandy Hook school shooting for denying this right doesn’t attract any merits because 99% of mass shooting spree in America happened in gun-free zones. (The offenders know that there will be zero resistance!) In Britain as well, when their government imposed a gun ban, crime rate went up 40%. [Handgun crime ‘up’ despite ban – http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1440764.stm]
Overhaul the criminal justice system
1) Stop Abuse of The Legal Process. Consider false accusations equally heinous as the allegation itself. (conviction rate of criminal cases are under 30%. 70+% are false or fabricated or have no locus standi)
2) Take perjury as a serious offense and punish the wrong doers so as to reduce the abuse of law and free up the resources.
3) Stop Media Trial that influence and create hindrances in legal process.
4) Multiply the number of courts/benches 100 times (if needed) to deliver time bound verdicts. I believe, Justice Delayed is Justice Denied.
5) Remove hard coded “PRESUMPTIONS” from the statutes and let Judiciary apply its mind. Judging based on presumptions is tantamount to lawlessness!
6) Remove categorical exemptions in the process based on caste, creed and gender.
7) Implement complete judicial reforms including but not limited to make erring judges accountable.
a) Amend criminal procedure code to include trial by jury.
b) Let all courts have division benches rather than trial by single judge, to reduce human errors in making rational decisions. (If supreme court has more than 50000+ pending cases that is a clear indication that our lower courts are delivering crap)
c) Include judiciary in Public Service Commission to SELECT judges based on quality, rather than ELECT/NOMINATE them. If Judiciary is to be kept away from legislative system, then introduce Judicial Service Commission so as to ensure the quality of judges.
d) Implement a perceptual monitoring system similar to PMP in which managers have to undergo several assignments and meet certain criteria to maintain the ‘status’. Those who cannot maintain the ‘status’ should be disqualified to judge other people’s life. This will ensure maintain and improve the quality of judgments.
Improve and standardize law enforcement procedures.
It is time to quarantine the age old unscientific thuggish colonial style of investigation. It is worth imitating the most modern investigation procedures followed by developed countries like sexual assault forensic evidence (SAFE) kit, Sexual offense evidence collection (SOEC) kit or Physical Evidence Recovery Kit (PERK) kit. This way our law enforcement officers know how to deal with a sexual assault case and what all data/evidences that they need to collect in order to ensure a higher rate of conviction.Such a kit consists of small boxes, microscope slides and plastic bags for collecting and storing evidence such as clothing fibers, hairs, saliva, semen or body fluid, which may help identify the assailant and provide evidence supporting prosecution in a criminal trial.
Although a kit’s contents may vary, it may include:
- Instructions
- Bags and sheets for evidence collection
- Swabs for collecting fluids from the lips, cheeks, thighs, vagina, anus, and buttocks
- Blood collection devices
- Comb used to collect hair and fiber from the victim’s body
- Clear glass slides
- Envelopes for preserving the victim’s clothes, head hair, pubic hair, and blood samples
- Nail pick for scraping debris from beneath the nails
- White sheets to catch physical evidence stripped from the body
- Documentation forms
- Labels
Most importantly there should be ample amount of forensic labs which should ensure no more than a weeks delay in delivering the results/reports. For fully implementing all the suggestions made above we can raise the funds by abandoning the invasive, tyrannical and illegal UID/Aadhaar project and divert the funds for building the most needed long overdue criminal justice infrastructure in less than 2 years time.
.
In less than a month after Justice Katju mentioned that 90% of Indians are idiots we have witnessed big demonstrations and violence in the name of “seeking” justice. I don’t think Katju was commenting about the IQ level of the people; he was pointing to the fact that how easy it is to trick the people using mass media. I do believe that majority of the masses do not have the time or interest in fact checking. They possess a strong belief that whatever media provides is ‘authentic’ truth. Apparently there is no reason to disagree that with a few exceptions. But the problem lies in ignoring the fact that, what media provides is only a portion of the truth. This is not intended to blame the media or discredit their work because like any other industry they are also working for profit. Most of them follow at least 60-40 ratio where 60% of the time/space is allocated for advertisements and 40% for news. So what we get is the “limited” amount of facts where that “limited” content will be the most sensationalised part of the facts.
Let us analyse the most recent incident. Well utilized RAPE in the recent history attempted to shed a great deal of light about that. What happened here is to cherry pick a real (read on and you will get why I said ‘real’) incident of rape and sensationalise it to the maximum possible extent so as to condition the thoughts of the masses to link to this incident when ever they hear about the word “RAPE”. It didn’t stop there; today one of the prominent malayalam news daily reported with the title “Increasing assaults; Only one fourth end up in conviction”. They also claim that India stands 3rd in the number of rapes with no mention about where that statistics come from. Here is what I found from UN International Statistics on Crime and Justice
Since people (most probably journalists too) do not spend time on fact checking they are not aware about the legal definition of rape neither they are aware of the proposed amendments in discussion. Those who are interested may read “Don’t make law against Rape – It’s our right”, says women! In Naom Chomsky’s words, this is Manufacturing Consent.
Well parented law abiding good citizens, having high level of values may question that why would anyone oppose a good intended amendment. Here is where the importance of fact checking matters the most. The report talks about 2,56,329 cases towards female assaults quoting National Crime Records Bureau statistics. Did they cheat you with the numbers… probably not.. Apparently, the numbers are slightly bigger as of 2011 reports
| Category |
Cases Reported |
KIDNAPPING & ABDUCTION OF WOMEN & GIRLS |
35565 |
MOLESTATION |
42968 |
SEXUAL HARASSMENT |
8570 |
CRUELTY BY HUSBAND AND RELATIVES |
99135 |
IMPORTATION OF GIRLS |
80 |
TOTAL CRIME AGAINST WOMEN (IPC+SLL) |
228650 |
RAPE |
24206 |
DOWRY DEATHS |
8618 |
| Total |
261474 |
That much shows the numbers and categories. I haven’t made my point yet and that is to expose the truth that everybody knows. Yes, I mean it; everybody knows why the conviction rate is very less. Here is how…
Kidnapping and abduction of women and girls – Most of the cases that falls under this category are filed by relatives of women/girls who have made their own conscious decision to live with someone whom they chose as life partners. When relatives do not like that relationship or when they are unable to locate the missing woman/girl, they will file the case. Few days later after the marriage registration is done the couple show up but the case remains at the same state waiting for the legal process to complete.
A great deal of abduction cases are filed against fathers if the relationship is entangled in a divorce battle. This is done as way to take personal revenge or to ensure a bigger ‘settlement’ amount for the mother.
Molestation – It will be hard to finda kidnapping/abduction of women/girls FIR where there is no molestation charge in it. Does that warrant any explanation why someone kidnap or abduct a girl/woman? Again this is a divorce weapon widely used against fathers. I’ve first hand information from an NRI who is facing this charge for “molesting” his 2 year old daughter as part of his divorce battle!!!
Sexual Harassment – This is simply a made up category that comes under the penal provision “Outraging the modesty of a woman”. It is usually unable to prove unless there are multiple witnesses. But in those cases that i’ve reliable source of information, such a case is reported only when there are witnesses; in other words, when a normal human intimate relationship is witnessed by others, it becomes a sexual harassment case against the male partner in order to save the “modesty of a woman”.
Cruelty by husband and relatives – Up until the middle of the first decade of this century when men started organizing themselves against the bogus complaints and legal harassment this section was considered to be a widely accepted form of “cruelty”. Thanks to thousands of TV serials, movies and several hundred kilometers worth media columns of articles. The relentless efforts of men’s group and the studies they conducted exposed the startling truth that only 1.9% of cases in this category end up in conviction. More information is available in the book “Equality for Men – Myth or Reality” freely downloadable from www.internationalmensday.in
Rape – This is the most notorious crime that can ever happen to a woman. That is a general opinion until you go and do a study on the legal definition of rape. Recently Pune police reported that 74% of the cases that they deal with are consensual sex! Even though this comes from a crooked political party I was not surprised about what this leader said, 90 percent rape cases in Haryana are consensual sex, says Congress leader.
Dowry Death – Here i’m not commenting my thoughts but just copying what Delhi High Court chief justice Shiv Narayan Dingra mentioned while acquitting a mother in law from dowry death charges in Rani Vs The State of NCT of Delhi
Charges seemed to have been framed in a mechanical manner. No effort is seem to have been made by the Trial Judge either at the time of framing charge or later on as to what offence was made out.
-
Every suicide after marriage cannot be presumed to be a suicide due to dowry demand. The tendency of the Court should not be that since a young bride has died after marriage, now somebody must be held culprit and the noose must be made to fit some neck.
I have intentionally left out one category just because of the low number of cases and the likely hood of bogus cases are nil or minimal. If you have read the links mentioned above and double checked with other available sources of information you will see a big disconnect between what you see in corporate media and the reality. The figures shown and the arguments made by the malayalam daily were not untrue but when we know more about the factual truth it doesn’t add up. May be because the journalists are not subject matter experts or they are not given enough time to do proper analysis or they are not given enough space to cover the whole story, but either way readers/viewers are screwed. Still some questions remain unanswered
“If number of reported cases are the indication of rise in crime as opposed to convictions, why do we need to spend crores of rupees in running courts and law enforcements? We could directly file the complaint in jail and they can put the accused in jail with no due process of law. So, are the crime rate increasing or the rate of false and bogus complaints increasing? How are we going to ensure justice for falsely accused? Don’t they deserve the right to live with dignity just because a tiny minority of people commit violent crimes?”
.
Here goes all the feminists up in arms shouting “don’t make rape laws gender neutral”. What I failed to understand is, why should we give legal immunity to certain people for committing or being party to a crime? Is it a women’s right to sexually assault men and boys? Read “Can a woman rape a man?”
Even the most conservative muslim society in pakistan have reported such incidents and they made their laws gender neutral. Read “3 women ‘dupe, kidnap, rape’ man in Karachi”
Some are claiming that there has never been any report of women raping a men and boys in India! If there is no law to protect men and boys from rape by women, where should they make a complaint and what report can we expect to come out? Apparently, the social stigma that men face in this regard is multi-fold bigger than what women face. Even sharing the ordeal will only end up in shaming comments and more distress.
Zimbabwe women accused of raping men ‘for rituals’
Just because Amir Khan conveniently ignored the sexual assault of minor boys by adult women doesn’t mean that it is not happening anywhere in India. A friend of mine told me that, he was “sexually used” by an adult woman in his family when he wasn’t even aware of what is going on. Women sexually abusing men at work place is also increasing; our government not recognizing it as a crime has given these female perpetrators an unprecedented confidence in crossing any limits whatsoever.
This is the era of slut-walks and pub-bharo demonstrations. Recently Pune police reported that more than 74% of rape cases reported last year were consensual sex. When the relationship breaks up, it becomes “rape”. India is going through a sex revolution and western culture (better say ‘western culturelessness’) is widely getting imported. National Commission for Women chair person mentioned about the dynamics of revealing attire and sexual offenses. Interestingly, all feminists are up in arms against chair person for their right to wear whatever they want and some even want her resignation! I’m not here advocating to dictate anyone’s lifestyle, but what I’m trying to point out is the double standards of feminists who are pro-western when it comes to lifestyle but when it comes to law making they take a U-turn and suddenly become anti-western! By wearing the mask of “abla-naris” and going for pub-bharos/slut-walks is making themselves nothing but clowns.
I see all these as a drama; a drama to hide the real catastrophic catch in this amendment. What this amendment does is to consider even the minor sexual offenses and give the same amount of punishments as the soon to be old “Rape”. One of the most weird clause in this bill says, continuously following a girl, loitering around a woman’s house, calling her phone repeatedly etc will also come under the umbrella of “Rape”/sexual assault. Which means if a woman complaints that a man is always seen around her house, that man may get 7+ years of imprisonment! Considering the magnitude of horrendous abuse of other women centric laws like IPC 498(a) and Domestic Violence Act, this amendment will definitely be catastrophic to Indian men. Already soaring male suicide rate is going to explode.
Folks, this is not a man vs woman fight. This is a conscious and deliberate attack on humanity itself. The central command center of India is not parliament. Those who sit there are proven to be not serving the people of India. Do your own analysis on the number of woman centric laws that got passed in past 5-10 years. It is all meant to dismantle the very genuine human relationship between a man and woman. It is designed to break all kind of man-woman bondage and mutual respect. Remove the binoculars of gender bias and try to see the bigger picture.
The Secret History of Feminism
Amir Khan, the Domestic Villain!
Posted on: June 19, 2012
Amir Khan as usual came up with his half truth and false alarm. This time its about Domestic Violence; against women. The most sellable story in the modern times. I’m not totally denying violence against women. I’m already getting enough hate comments saying that I’m a women hater, I’m spitting out American thoughts, so on and so forth. Let me make it clear, those who make those comments completely failed to understand what I’m talking about. I would recommend them to go over the about page and get more insight. All I’m trying to do is to show the world that there exists one more side for the coin! Total denial is total foolishness.
Everyday we read the news of violence by wife against husband. The latest one is the murder of husband by a doctor. http://www.ndtv.com/article/cities/doctor-kills-husband-for-demanding-sex-claims-police-232854 . See the side bar for more such news. Mr Amir Khan, did you get a chance to look at the suicide statistics? Why is it that the number of suicides of married men are twice as much as married women? Why is government of India and especially woman’s rights advocates knee jerking to make Domestic Violence Act gender neutral? Are they so sure that more women will go to jail if protection of this Act is extended to men?
There are four women protection bills pending in the parliament at present.
- Amendment of 498a as ordered by Supreme Court of India due to patented misuse.
- Sexual harassment at workplace. (with no protection for men and provisions for easy misuse)
- Marriage law amendment. (to destroy family system and reduce population)
- 33% reservation of women in parliament (to undermine the constitution and uproot democracy)
Amir, you should be a contractor hired to condition the public mindset to pass all or some of the above listed laws. This is nothing but false alarm and fear mongering. Your propaganda may work on those people who do not have access to internet.
Patriachy has done no good for men; it only dumped more burden on men. More over, history says most part of India were matrilineal. It is only during the foreign invasion that all women find shelter behind men. If a tiny minority of men are abusive to women, that doesn’t grant you the right to paint every men with the same brush Mr, Khan.
Till date, feminists have been used as hunting dogs. The real hunter is waiting behind the scenes for the prey to be tired and easy to capture. In the history of humanity, regardless of the culture and creed, what we have seen is that all the documented civilizations were designed to protect and provide women not men. This kind of conscious attempt to dupe and turn women against men and vice versa has started exactly 20 years ago as part of United Nations resolution, Agenda 21.
Those who do not know what that is may watch this
What they have found is that, a strong foundation of family system is the root cause of “explosive” population. They found it as a threat to their own imperial power structure. Action plans were architected and is being executed to safeguard their position and to make the 3rd world remain 3rd or even 4rth! Some people have mistakenly call it women empowerment. The key purpose is to destroy all sorts of mutual support systems like family religion and so forth, by the people themselves!!!. How is this done? See what former KGB agent is saying.
KGB Psychological Warfare and Subversion Strategy
Destroying a country –
–> Demoralization
–> Destabilization
–> Crisis
–> Civil War or Invasion
–> Normalization
He suggests solutions..
– Stop importing propaganda
– Restrict foreign TV
– Self restrain
– etc etc watch and learn…
He slams women’s lib and all kinda libs
He talks a lot about India
1hr 3mts
Once these mutual support systems are dismantled it will be easy to shift the role of protector and provider over to the BIG BROTHER; the government. This is exactly what happened in the west. Now American’s are asked to implant RFID chip in their forearm if they want to avail food stamps. Next will be social security benefits and that will cover the entire population!!!
“The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves.” – Dresden James
New World Order operative’s plan to destroy the foundation of our nation is working out pretty well.
Morons in India are applauding it as women empowerment.
Who is the single largest sponsor of feminism? Rockefeller Foundation…
Where is UN head office sitting? On Rockefeller’s property (though donated)…
Who is running ICICI bank? The Rockefellers…
Who is running Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)? The Rockefellers…
Who wants to implant RFID chip on every human being on earth? The Rockefellers…
Who is Rothchild’s puppet? The Rockefellers…
Who wants to introduce Aadhaar/UID in India… THE BANKS…..
Who is the the Father of RBI? Lord Rothchilds….
Who is the financial advisory of Govt of India? The Rothchilds
Read “Is boy preference a brain product of CFR” and learn more.
Agree that women face violence at home; but is that only women who face violence at home? One in two women? Really? C’mone Amir, are you kidding? Based on your theory one of your two wives, Reena or Kiran, should have faced violence from you. Are you ready to accept that and go to jail? Or are you ready to correct and apologize to all the viewers that you deceived?
.
This is on the basis of an article published in a commercial news daily, Mathrubhumi.com (http://www.mathrubhumi.com/story.php?id=276488) regarding public consultation for new women protection law. I’ve not found anything regarding this subject in the website of Kerala Legislative Assembly (http://kerala.gov.in/ or http://www.niyamasabha.org) which I believe is the ultimate law making body in the State of Kerala. I am not aware of any bill presented or any committee formed by the assembly of Kerala in order to draft, discuss and decide on any such new laws.
Before I get more information about the official details, I would like to make some comments about the news. The news article primarily focus on 5 points
- Taking pictures of women violating their privacy
- Possession of such pictures and videos
- Heads of the educational institutions can ban mobile phones
- Presumption of Rape, in case of death of woman whose modesty is outraged.
- Include provision to protect privacy of women in public places
Taking picture of women violating their privacy
- What is the definition of public and private when it comes to a person?
- Where are the places that are considered to be public where a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy?
- Is this regardless of the consent of the women ?
- When in dispute, what hybrid technology will be applied to validate the “once given consent”? Is that torture?
Possession of such pictures and videos
- How does a person know whether or not the picture and video have made by violating the privacy of women?
- Is Mr. Radhakrishnan suggesting a total ban of taking pictures and videos of women?
- Will it be an offense if women are found in possession of such pictures and videos?
- If this has to be regulated through legislation then first thing to do is to legislate what is allowed; Sir, is this a step towards legalizing pornography?
- Is this government encroachment into personal life of citizens?
Heads of the educational organizations can ban mobile phones
I believe, not only educational institutions but also any kind of organizations can have their own rules and bylaws on their private property. Even the head of government owned educational institutions, nothing is preventing them to bring such bans. By putting this into statute books, is Mr.Radhakrishnan opening the doors of educational institutions, whether in private or public sector, for free entrance of his Police. He may not have the intention to do that, but what is the guarantee that the next minister will not misuse this unlimited power?
Presumption of Rape, in case of abnormal death of woman whose modesty is outraged
- Are we eager to give away the universal and natural human right to be considered innocent until proven guilty?
- Indian statutes do not consider women as a perpetrators of rape. If a woman is violating the privacy of another women and takes obscene pictures or videos to malign the modesty, how will the presumption trick work? Is Mr. Radhakrishnan suggesting to let the perpetrators go on ‘humanitarian’ grounds? Or is there a presumption in the suggested statute that women will NEVER do it?
- What if the parties involved consciously make the video and pictures for their personal gratification and an unknown third party ‘steals’ it and publish it? According to Mr.Radhakrishnan who all have to go to face Rape? The person in the footage, the person who steals it and everyone who received it whether sought or unsought!!!
I have a trivial suggestion here Sir – Laws cannot implement Morality!
Include provision to protect the privacy in public places
- What level of privacy is expected on public places?
- What is the definition of public places then?
- Is this a step towards a totalitarian neo fascist government under the facade of women protection?
Thoughts
Why do we need a duplicate law when we have Section 67 of Information Technology Act which prohibits publishing of information which is obscene in electronic form.
Section 354 of Indian Penal Code does not define what constitutes the outrage of female modesty, hence, this is also applicable.
If the idea is to prohibit taking pictures and videos without the consent of the parties involved, then what we need is a comprehensive privacy law. Going for a presumption based one sex protection is violation of the constitutional right to equal protection before law.
If the idea is to prevent the suicides, then we need a comprehensive sexual intimidation law ( https://prassoon.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/it%E2%80%99s-high-time-for-sexual-intimidation-law/ ) which may prevent sky rocketing male suicide who face false allegations. Without properly analysing the gravity of the issue and making irrational and draconian laws will give adverse effect in the society just the same way it did in the other presumption based women protection laws. Result – Every 9 minutes one husband commits suicide! (Source NCRB) A detailed report on this subject is available here.
Those who want to send this to the ministers office may use the printer friendly version.
.
Fees payable to lawyers
Posted on: March 12, 2012
“How much will this lawyer charge me?” This is the question that arises in the mind of every litigant, more than the questions about their original problem that took them to the lawyer. How many litigants got it answered before signing the ‘vakalathnama’? “None”, would be too hypothetical; a much more realistic answer is ‘to my knowledge, NONE’.
This article is an attempt to give you ‘some’ idea (I’m not a lawyer but I will try to get you as much information as possible) in this context. Act 25 of 1961 was introduced in the parliament to consolidate all the existing Acts related to judicial administration. This bill repealed Legal Practitioners Act, 1879, Bombay Pleaders Act 1920, the Indian Bar Council Act, 1926 and brought in The Advocates Act, 1961. For the purpose of the subject matter concerned, we will be interested in “Bar Council of India”, which, as per section 2(e) means, the Bar Council constituted under Section 4 for the territories to which this Act extends. The details of various bar councils are defined in the Act; precisely, there will be one Bar Council of India and under that there will be several State Bar Councils. Some of the States and union territories are clubbed together under one bar council. So if you interested in specifics, you may please check the Act itself.
As a litigant, it is nice to note that this is not just a council of members; as per section 42 of the Act, the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council shall have the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. All proceedings before a disciplinary committee of a Bar Council shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), and every such disciplinary committee shall be deemed to be a civil court for the purpose of sections 480, 482 and 485 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (5 of 1898).
Power to make rules– Sec.34 gives High Court the power to make rules; Sec 49 gives general power to Bar Council of India to make rules; Sec 49A gives Central government the power to make rules. We are interested in Sec 34(1A) – The High Court shall make rules for fixing and regulating by taxation or otherwise the fees payable as costs by any party in respect of the fees of his adversary’s advocate upon all proceedings in the High Court or in any Court subordinate thereto.
I’m quoting THE BAR COUNCIL OF KERALA, RULES 1979 here, for explanation; and only relevant points are mentioned here without going into the nitty-gritty. Readers from other parts of India may check out their own state’s rule.
RULES REGARDING FEES PAYABLE TO ADVOCATES
In exercise of the powers under Article 225 and 227 of the Constitution of India and of all other powers thereunto enabling and with the previous approval of the Governor of Kerala conveyed in G.O(MS) 60/69/Home, dated 7th February,
1969 the High Court of Kerala frames the following rules regarding the fees allowable to legal practitioners in the High court and in the Subordinate Courts, in super session of all the existing rules in the matter.
Please note that for the purposes of these rules the term ‘advocate’ includes a vakil or pleader authorized to practice before civil courts.
Scale of fees: – Section 6 says, in suits for money effect or other personal property or for land or other immovable property of any description, fees shall be payable on the following scale:-
(1) Small cause suits – at 7½% of the claim subject to a minimum of Rs.25
(2) Original suits-
(i) If the amount or value of the claim does not exceed Rs.5, 000/-
at *(12½%) subject to a minimum of Rs.50
(ii) If the amount or value exceeds Rs.5,000 but does not exceed
Rs.20,000 on Rs.5,000 as above and on the remainder at *(7 ½%).
(iii) If the amount or value exceeds Rs.20,000 but does not exceed
Rs.50,000 on Rs.20,000 as above and on the remainder at 3%
(iv) If the amount or value exceeds Rs.50,000 on Rs.50,000 as above and on the remainder at 1%
Provided that when a suit is compromised, settled or withdrawn, or is decided solely on the admission of the parties without any investigation or is decided exparte or dismissed for default before any evidence is recorded, the fee payable shall be one half of the scheduled rate or Rs.25 in the case of Small Cause Suits and *(Rs.100) in the case of Original Suits, whichever is higher.
Section 7 says,
in appeals for money, effects or other personal property, or for and or other immovable property, the fee payable shall be as calculated under Rules 6(2) subject to a minimum of Rs.50; but when such appeals are settled, withdrawn, compromised or dismissed for default, one half of the fee calculated as above, subject to a minimum of Rs.50 shall alone be payable.
All other sections talk about how much to pay at various stages, say, at the time of petition, declaration suits, inter-pleader suits, execution of decree so on and so forth which doesn’t carry a fees of over Rs.2000/- at any point. But, the last section (37) says as below…
37. Nothing in these rules shall be deemed to affect any agreement between an advocate and his client regarding fees.
Some people might go mad over this. There are already suggestions pending before the parliament asking to set a ceiling for the amount that can be charged by an advocate. I personally do not want any restrictions, per se, as long as the fees are decided by the market. What I mean is, allowing unions to decide the fees is not acceptable at all. Fees should be set by the MARKET – Demand and Supply.
I believe, as any other professionals, advocates should also have the liberty to set the fees for their labour. It is not fair to set a fixed salary for anyone who is not getting paid out of tax money. Can we fix the price of a driver, painter, doctor, engineer or software professional? Absolutely not! But, on the other hand there should definitely be some rules to let the litigants know upfront how costly the lawyer that s/he is going to hire. If there exists any such rule that I’m not aware of, please bring that up. Your comments and suggestions are most welcome. Let’s work together to get this done, for the benefit of present and future litigants.
[Updated on Nov 19, 2014] Here is the latest amended rule. Basically, you may add 100 to 500% to the figures mentioned above. http://www.egazette.kerala.gov.in/pdf/2012/25/Part_3/Judicial.pdf
Out of the pain felt from the backlash of pro-family Men’s group several women organizations are under deep distress; that are busy putting together a theory to counter the startling realities brought into light by Save Indian Family advocates.
Pro-family groups and activists are facing collective badmouthing from those who are hell bend on destroying the social fabric at the tunes of external globalist evil forces like CFR, Builderberg, USAID etc from which enormous amount of funds flow endlessly.
One of such Tamilnadu based organization even did a survey and over 100 page report, only to solidify the findings and arguments made by Save Indian Family advocates.
The core of this report clings on to the aspect of rising complaints, not conviction as pointed out by pro-family groups. This is a food for thought for the readers to find the logic in the presumption that “increased number of complaints indicates increased number of crime”. If it is so, then what is the need to spend huge amount of money and several years for investigations and trials. There will only be the need of Jails where people register complaints and they can put all the accused behind bars.
The SHOs interviewed opined that educated and employed young married girls are becoming self-centered due to their economic self-reliant. They are too sensitive and highly emotional as they don’t share the ethos and values imbibed by the members of the matrimonial family. They have less tolerance level and are against joint family system. Many complainants prefer to live separately with their husbands and as a result arises conflict with husbands and in-laws. Their parents rather than advising her mostly fuel their daughter’s emotions and supported her decisions.
Though they claim no charges were framed on such complaints, one can easily understand that it is to safe guard their jobs and hide their own black deeds. Is that ever happened in the history of this planet that the culprits admitting the crime for the purpose of preparing a report?
The SHOs also shared that the women develop an attitude that if they incorporate dowry component in the complaint petitions, it increases the severity of the offence. People develop a wrong perception that only dowry complaints are entertained by the police. Even the advocates have similar views; misguide their clients and prepare the petitions with a tone of dowry harassment.
It will be repetition of the same petition to amend 498a if I start pointing out the entire survey report here. Aggrieved by the findings and lack of arguments to counter the pro-family advocates, women organizations are now blaming “Patriachy”; ignoring the fact that it is the same “Patriachy” which enacted this law. They claim that low conviction is not because of false allegations or lack of evidences to prove the offence but because of the mind-set of Judiciary!
|
Final Conviction Rate at the level of Appeallate Courts |
||||||||||
| Chennai | Coimbatore | Cuddalore | Dindigal | Kanchipuram | Kanyakumari | Madurai | Salem | Sivagangai | Trichy | Virudhunagar |
| 1.9% | 7.7% | 7.5% | 1.0% | 15% | 1.9% | 1.7% | 2.9% | 2.9% | 2.7% | 5.1% |
Though the Conviction Rate for the offences under Sec 498A in Trial Courts is 20%, the final conviction rate declined to an average of 3.2%. The report invariably blames Judiciary with no mention of the chances of corruption in lower courts resulting in higher rate of convictions. It says “The mismatch between the conviction rate in trial courts and appellate courts raises a serious question about justice delivery system and the legal safeguards for women victims.”
In short EKTA / AIDWA and their likes are claiming that, in matriarchal mind-set false allegations are “Genuine” and a stated “women’s right”! The report showers blessing and praises to those who make false allegations saying “Further, due to the constant attempts by various organizations women started complaining about dowry harassment to the police; of course it is a healthy sign.
I would like to borrow the words from Smt. C.P.Sujaya IAS (Retd) and appeal the women organizations with a slight modification, “It is now time – in this new century – for the women’s movements to go in for a measured exercise of collective and honest soul-searching.”
IPC 498(a) boom in Kerala
Posted on: April 23, 2011
A legislation which was originally brought in with a good intention to protect innocent women from dowry harassment is now being fearlessly misused by new age ill-educated women all over India with the core motive of “get rich overnight”.
It is a national shame and hard to agree fact that parents are taking broken marriages as an opportunity to cash out their daughters. This is not the only one section of the penal code that comes in to picture while cashing out daughters. Indian Penal Code provides various other sections like CrPC 125, Hindu Marriage Act, Hindu Adoption and Marriages Act and the latest being Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act which can be used to have a free of cost living out of someone else’s hard earned money.
The western tactics to break down the family system and there by destabilize India has proven to be worked out quite well so far. A Startling 1689 cases in a tiny state like Kerala that too in just four months would tell the success story of this “get rich overnight scheme” .
Parliamentary committee is considering a petition by Dr, Anupama Singh, and law commission has called for public opinion based on standing instruction given by Supreme Court of India to make proper amendments to 498a in order to curb the menace of rampant misuse. This huge number of cases, in academically, economically and socially advanced state like Kerala which has a fabulous sex ratio of 1084 women for 1000 men, underscores the necessity of repealing this draconian law from the statute books once and for all.
Stand up for your rights 